(PC) Hill v. Newsom

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NATHAN HILL, No. 2:19-CV-01680 DJC AC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 By order filed May 1, 2024, this court ordered plaintiff to show cause why he has not 18 provided additional identifying information for defendants Medina and Gomez in order to effect 19 service of process on these defendants. ECF No. 115 at 2. This order warned plaintiff that absent 20 good cause for failing to complete service, the court would recommend dismissal without 21 prejudice of defendants Medina and Gomez. Plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order to 22 show cause and the time period to do so has passed. 23 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires that a defendant be served within 90 days 24 after the complaint is filed. This period may only be extended by the court if plaintiff shows good 25 cause for the failure to timely serve the defendant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Absent good cause, the 26 court must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant. Id. 27 In this case, plaintiff did not respond to the court’s order and has not provided any reason 28 why the time period for affecting service of process on defendants Medina and Gomez should be 1 || extended. See Habib v. GMC, 15 F.3d 72, 73 (6th Cir. 1994) (emphasizing that plaintiff has the 2 | burden of demonstrating good cause for the failure to properly effect service within the time 3 || provided by Rule 4(m)). In light of this record, the undersigned recommends dismissing 4 || defendants Medina and Gomez from this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the 5 || Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 6 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Medina and Gomez be dismissed 7 || without prejudice based on plaintiffs failure to effect timely service of process. 8 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 9 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 10 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 11 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 12 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 13 || may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 14 | Cir. 1991). 15 | DATED: August 12, 2024 ~ 16 AMhen—lChore ALLISON CLAIRE 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28